Yigal Chripun wrote:
> regarding working on a remote machine:
> you can mount a remote file system through ssh and work localy on that
> remoted filesystem.
I do that sometimes, but it's a problem when trying to run the
compiler/debugger, as they need to run on the remote machine, not just
locally <g>.
Also, mounting a remote filesystem fails on Windows. I know, that really
sux. At least putty works.
(10 years ago, I wired up every room in the house with two RG6 cables
and two Cat5 cables while it was under construction. Did it myself
because the electrical contractor had no idea how to handle high
frequency wires, I had to rip all his stuff out and do it over. I had no
use for it at the time. I'm sure glad now it was done, everything I have
seems to want to plug in to it! Anyhow, I have several machines with
different OSs on them on the lan, and ssh to run them from a central
location.)

Bill Baxter wrote:
> That could be true, but you said the thing that prompted this idea was
> enterprise-y customers looking for an enterprise-y IDE. Vim ain't on
> that roster.
This thread makes it fairly clear that this idea won't fill the bill for
a full featured IDE. But I think supporting a lightweight one is still
getting us closer.

On 13/10/2009 01:55, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:20:01AM +0200, Yigal Chripun wrote:
>> regarding working on a remote machine:
>> you can mount a remote file system through ssh and work localy on that
>> remoted filesystem.
>
> Eh, sshfs leaves a lot to be desired. There is a noticeable lag when
> performing basic operations on it - it really kills the flow when doing
> a rapid edit/compile loop.
>
> It sounds cool on paper, but in practice is rather disappointing.
>
that's a quality of implementation issue. eclipse caches the files
locally and keeps things synced. this removes any lag while editing the
file.
I use this at work and it's quite good.

On 13/10/2009 07:07, Walter Bright wrote:
> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>> regarding working on a remote machine:
>> you can mount a remote file system through ssh and work localy on that
>> remoted filesystem.
>
> I do that sometimes, but it's a problem when trying to run the
> compiler/debugger, as they need to run on the remote machine, not just
> locally <g>.
Eclipse has integration for that. it can execute remote commands and has
remote debugging - the local eclipse debugger UI speaks with a remote
gdb session. and if you really prefer command-line, you can always use
the terminal view.
>
> Also, mounting a remote filesystem fails on Windows. I know, that really
> sux. At least putty works.
this requires a 3rd party tool on windows. iirc, WebDrive is free, and
for 30$ you can get sftpDrive.
>
> (10 years ago, I wired up every room in the house with two RG6 cables
> and two Cat5 cables while it was under construction. Did it myself
> because the electrical contractor had no idea how to handle high
> frequency wires, I had to rip all his stuff out and do it over. I had no
> use for it at the time. I'm sure glad now it was done, everything I have
> seems to want to plug in to it! Anyhow, I have several machines with
> different OSs on them on the lan, and ssh to run them from a central
> location.)

Walter Bright wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> That could be true, but you said the thing that prompted this idea was
>> enterprise-y customers looking for an enterprise-y IDE. Vim ain't on
>> that roster.
>
> This thread makes it fairly clear that this idea won't fill the bill for
> a full featured IDE. But I think supporting a lightweight one is still
> getting us closer.
I completely agree, nobody will code a monster IDE like Eclipse or
Visual Studio dedicated to D anytime soon.
I have only respect for Descent, I use it on linux and it is really
great. But Eclipse is killing me, there is no reason for an IDE to be
that heavy, slow and unresponsive. How come a database server can pull
off any data query from a multi-gigabyte database on disk in half a
millisecond yet Eclipse can't seem to feel responsive when working with
less than a hundred megabytes in system memory. (On that note, D needs a
b-tree module among others :x)
I really feel we need a dedicated D IDE to promote the language, and
such an IDE needs to start somewhere, most only do syntax highlighting
so far, which is trivial to implement. A compiler interface to at least
get semantics information from the source files is therefore a *big*
plus in that direction.
XML output can also be used in so many different ways, for
documentation, bindings, analysis and more. And JSON output can be used
directly from any language with a very lightweight parser.
Besides, this doesn't mean Walter is going to put everything on hold to
implement this feature, I think he only wanted to get feedback on an
idea he had so when he gets time to implement it, he knows what the
community wants.
Jeremie

language_fan wrote:
> "Practical" languages
> have lots of boiler-plate, and I can easily generate hundreds of lines of
> code with a couple of key combinations or mouse clicks.
Can you give some examples? I can only think of some that generate some
lines of code, not hundreds.

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> language_fan wrote:
> > "Practical" languages
>> have lots of boiler-plate, and I can easily generate hundreds of lines of
>> code with a couple of key combinations or mouse clicks.
>
> Can you give some examples? I can only think of some that generate some
> lines of code, not hundreds.
linq-to-sql

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Video game developers don't make multiplayer games by sending a compressed
> video stream of the fully-rendered frame - they know that would be unusable.
> Instead, they just send the minimum higher-level information that's actually
> needed, like "PlayerA changed direction 72 degrees" (over-simplification, of
> course). And they send it to a client that'll never insist on crap like
> interpreted JS or open-for-interpretation standards. And when there's a
> technology that's inadequate for their needs, like TCP, they make a proper
> replacement instead of hacking in a half-assed "solution" on top of the
> offender, TCP. And it works great even though those programs have visuals
> that are *far* more complex than a typical GUI app. So why can't a windowing
> toolkit be extended to do the same? And do so *without* building it on top
> such warped, crumbling, mis-engineered foundations as (X)HTML, Ajax, etc.?
This is generally true, although see OnLive (http://www.onlive.com/). I
hear it works better than you'd expect, but don't have much interest in
actually trying it.

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:07:34 -0700, Walter Bright thusly wrote:
> Yigal Chripun wrote:
>> regarding working on a remote machine: you can mount a remote file
>> system through ssh and work localy on that remoted filesystem.
>
> I do that sometimes, but it's a problem when trying to run the
> compiler/debugger, as they need to run on the remote machine, not just
> locally <g>.
>
> Also, mounting a remote filesystem fails on Windows. I know, that really
> sux. At least putty works.
>
> (10 years ago, I wired up every room in the house with two RG6 cables
> and two Cat5 cables while it was under construction. Did it myself
> because the electrical contractor had no idea how to handle high
> frequency wires, I had to rip all his stuff out and do it over. I had no
> use for it at the time. I'm sure glad now it was done, everything I have
> seems to want to plug in to it! Anyhow, I have several machines with
> different OSs on them on the lan, and ssh to run them from a central
> location.)
Lucky you. Couple of friends of mine chose the 'data cabling' option from
the electrical contractor for their new homes (maybe 2-3 years ago) when
they were under construction. The rails on the wall were equipped with
RJ11 connectors! Totally useless for LAN, but ok for phone cables and
thus xDSL. Another note -- I would use virtualization these days when
several OSs are needed.